PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
238.00 - 242.07
140.53 - 242.25
26.77M / 38.44M (Avg.)
25.64 | 9.39
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
29.95%
Revenue growth above 1.5x PINS's 16.75%. David Dodd would confirm if the firm has a unique advantage driving sales higher.
16.74%
Gross profit growth at 75-90% of PINS's 21.27%. Bill Ackman would demand operational improvements to match competitor gains.
28.36%
Positive EBIT growth while PINS is negative. John Neff might see a substantial edge in operational management.
28.36%
Operating income growth under 50% of PINS's 87.79%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
35.00%
Net income growth under 50% of PINS's 334.38%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
36.84%
EPS growth under 50% of PINS's 334.09%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
36.84%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of PINS's 335.66%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
1.74%
Share count expansion well above PINS's 0.05%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
1.74%
Diluted share count expanding well above PINS's 0.07%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-34.85%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-60.27%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
144.85%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of PINS's 310.48%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
144.85%
5Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of PINS's 217.57%. Martin Whitman would worry about a lagging mid-term growth trajectory.
144.85%
3Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x PINS's 46.66%. David Dodd would confirm if there's an emerging competitive moat driving recent gains.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-46.06%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while PINS is at 166.88%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-46.06%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while PINS is 133.35%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-46.06%
Negative 3Y CAGR while PINS is 188.03%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
10.39%
R&D growth drastically higher vs. PINS's 8.43%. Michael Burry fears near-term margin erosion unless breakthroughs are imminent.
12.99%
SG&A growth well above PINS's 22.36%. Michael Burry sees potential margin erosion unless it translates into higher sales or brand equity.